Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

Everyone's debating whether Opus or Codex or Gemini writes better code this month. Jyothi thinks that's the wrong question entirely. Models get replaced. Rankings flip every few months. Whatever wins the coding benchmark this quarter loses it next quarter, and the debate resets to zero. The harness doesn't reset.... show more

Aakash Gupta

295,027 subscribers

17,219 просмотров • 5 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

The entire AI industry is racing to build the smartest model. Satya Nadella just admitted that is not where the money is. The model is not the product. The harness is. That is the exact line. And it changes what Microsoft is actually competing on. OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, xAI, Meta every frontier lab is pouring hundreds of billions into training compute, chasing the next capability jump. Each betting that raw model intelligence is the moat. Microsoft is doing the opposite. It is building the harness the orchestration layer that sits above the model, connecting it to tools, data, permissions, sub-agents, and enterprise workflows. And it is letting OpenAI, Anthropic, and MAI compete to plug into it. "You need the model. But the model is not the product. The harness is." So do the math on what a harness actually does. A raw model dropped into an enterprise answers questions. That is a chatbot. A harness turns that same model into an agent that reads the SharePoint, edits the ERP entry, pulls the GitHub PR, updates Salesforce, and files the Excel report with the right permissions, the right audit trail, and the right sub-agent for each sub-task. The model provides the intelligence. The harness converts intelligence into work. Now here's where it gets interesting. "Even the best model in the world will feel broken without a great harness. And an okay model with a great harness can feel like magic." If that is true, the enterprise buyer is not buying model quality. The enterprise buyer is buying the harness. Which means model quality becomes a commodity input over time, and harness quality becomes the sustainable moat. Compare that to the strategy the entire frontier lab industry is executing. Everyone else is chasing the numerator raw intelligence. Almost nobody at scale is racing to build the denominator the orchestration layer that determines whether that intelligence can actually be deployed profitably inside a real company. The frontier model race has a 10 to 20 percent chance of producing a single dominant winner. Nadella just told the industry he does not need to be that winner. If OpenAI wins, Microsoft wins. If Anthropic wins, Microsoft wins. If MAI wins, Microsoft wins. If someone Microsoft has never heard of trains a better model in 2027, Microsoft still wins. Because the compute they train on, the harness they get plugged into, the enterprise contracts they get delivered through, and the products they sit inside are all Microsoft. He is not building the best AI model. He is building the layer that the best AI model has to run on to make anyone money. I wonder which position looks more valuable in ten years.

The entire AI industry is racing to build the smartest model. Satya Nadella just admitted that is not where the money is. The model is not the product. The harness is. That is the exact line. And it changes what Microsoft is actually competing on. OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, xAI, Meta every frontier lab is pouring hundreds of billions into training compute, chasing the next capability jump. Each betting that raw model intelligence is the moat. Microsoft is doing the opposite. It is building the harness the orchestration layer that sits above the model, connecting it to tools, data, permissions, sub-agents, and enterprise workflows. And it is letting OpenAI, Anthropic, and MAI compete to plug into it. "You need the model. But the model is not the product. The harness is." So do the math on what a harness actually does. A raw model dropped into an enterprise answers questions. That is a chatbot. A harness turns that same model into an agent that reads the SharePoint, edits the ERP entry, pulls the GitHub PR, updates Salesforce, and files the Excel report with the right permissions, the right audit trail, and the right sub-agent for each sub-task. The model provides the intelligence. The harness converts intelligence into work. Now here's where it gets interesting. "Even the best model in the world will feel broken without a great harness. And an okay model with a great harness can feel like magic." If that is true, the enterprise buyer is not buying model quality. The enterprise buyer is buying the harness. Which means model quality becomes a commodity input over time, and harness quality becomes the sustainable moat. Compare that to the strategy the entire frontier lab industry is executing. Everyone else is chasing the numerator raw intelligence. Almost nobody at scale is racing to build the denominator the orchestration layer that determines whether that intelligence can actually be deployed profitably inside a real company. The frontier model race has a 10 to 20 percent chance of producing a single dominant winner. Nadella just told the industry he does not need to be that winner. If OpenAI wins, Microsoft wins. If Anthropic wins, Microsoft wins. If MAI wins, Microsoft wins. If someone Microsoft has never heard of trains a better model in 2027, Microsoft still wins. Because the compute they train on, the harness they get plugged into, the enterprise contracts they get delivered through, and the products they sit inside are all Microsoft. He is not building the best AI model. He is building the layer that the best AI model has to run on to make anyone money. I wonder which position looks more valuable in ten years.

Vikram M

21,463 просмотров • 18 дней назад

this is huge news from Cursor, they've pulled of the impossible and turned their ai-wrapper into a in-destructible moat sam altman literally called it cursor's ai agent harness is available for anyone to build on, which means ai models are now a commodity > 1-time install and now anyone can run cursor's agent locally or via cloud. use any model (e.g. gpt 5.5) but with the added cursor harness that makes it 10X better. > its so good that 3 of cursors biggest competitors are embedding it into their products. > now cursor DOESN'T DEPEND on anthropic or openai. their own model (composer 2) competes directly! yesterday sam altman said the ai model and harness are one and the same and today cursor turned their harness into a self-owned moat fucking masterclass (coming from a former cursor / ai wrapper hater)

this is huge news from Cursor, they've pulled of the impossible and turned their ai-wrapper into a in-destructible moat sam altman literally called it cursor's ai agent harness is available for anyone to build on, which means ai models are now a commodity > 1-time install and now anyone can run cursor's agent locally or via cloud. use any model (e.g. gpt 5.5) but with the added cursor harness that makes it 10X better. > its so good that 3 of cursors biggest competitors are embedding it into their products. > now cursor DOESN'T DEPEND on anthropic or openai. their own model (composer 2) competes directly! yesterday sam altman said the ai model and harness are one and the same and today cursor turned their harness into a self-owned moat fucking masterclass (coming from a former cursor / ai wrapper hater)

Ejaaz

949,859 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

small local model that falls apart in bloated agents like openclaw just runs like a wild horse in hermes agent. and that's not even my line, someone else called it that, i've just been quietly pointing people at this harness for months because it held up on everything i threw at it, 3b models all the way to one trillion params. watch this happen on my own machine. i pointed hermes agent at a local http endpoint, gemma 4 12b on my 3090 llama.cpp server, and it auto-detected the model and started working immediately. no config wrestling, no broken tool calls, no babysitting the output format, i typed in a url and it just went. the whole clip is exactly that, start to finish, no errors, no retries, butter smooth. and the tool calling, the one thing that quietly breaks most local setups, works here like it's nothing. it's not the model that's flaky, it's the harness around it. hermes agent is the first agent i've run that actually gets that right. one url, one local model on one card, and it runs like a wild horse.

small local model that falls apart in bloated agents like openclaw just runs like a wild horse in hermes agent. and that's not even my line, someone else called it that, i've just been quietly pointing people at this harness for months because it held up on everything i threw at it, 3b models all the way to one trillion params. watch this happen on my own machine. i pointed hermes agent at a local http endpoint, gemma 4 12b on my 3090 llama.cpp server, and it auto-detected the model and started working immediately. no config wrestling, no broken tool calls, no babysitting the output format, i typed in a url and it just went. the whole clip is exactly that, start to finish, no errors, no retries, butter smooth. and the tool calling, the one thing that quietly breaks most local setups, works here like it's nothing. it's not the model that's flaky, it's the harness around it. hermes agent is the first agent i've run that actually gets that right. one url, one local model on one card, and it runs like a wild horse.

Sudo su

27,339 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Anthropic Engineer Andrej Karpathy: "Stop training from scratch. Take what the model already learned - adapt it - ship it At OpenAI we replaced months of work with a few lines of code. Better results every time " the Karpathy formula for working with AI: step 1 → stop building from zero. the model already learned the hard part - just point it at your task step 2 → stop adding complexity, the simplest architecture beat everything in 2014 - simpler always wins step 3 → train only the last layer and freeze everything else - minutes instead of months. better results he taught this at Stanford 10 years ago - then applied it at OpenAI, Tesla, and Anthropic the advice never changed - because it never stopped working watch - bookmark, then read article below ↓

Anthropic Engineer Andrej Karpathy: "Stop training from scratch. Take what the model already learned - adapt it - ship it At OpenAI we replaced months of work with a few lines of code. Better results every time " the Karpathy formula for working with AI: step 1 → stop building from zero. the model already learned the hard part - just point it at your task step 2 → stop adding complexity, the simplest architecture beat everything in 2014 - simpler always wins step 3 → train only the last layer and freeze everything else - minutes instead of months. better results he taught this at Stanford 10 years ago - then applied it at OpenAI, Tesla, and Anthropic the advice never changed - because it never stopped working watch - bookmark, then read article below ↓

codila

24,203 просмотров • 17 дней назад

Don’t put your head in the sand … you may be scared of it but that isn’t going to stop 🛑 it from happening- pls get educated on all the opportunities and realities of the modern ai 🤖 movement. If you aren’t using ai apps to enhance your life you’re falling behind at least professionally so pls, pls start educating yourself. Too many here want to talk about it in the abstract or debate the virtues or dangers and that beyond ok but it’s not ok to not understand the counter point which is this is profound technology and you should learn to harness it ❣️

Don’t put your head in the sand … you may be scared of it but that isn’t going to stop 🛑 it from happening- pls get educated on all the opportunities and realities of the modern ai 🤖 movement. If you aren’t using ai apps to enhance your life you’re falling behind at least professionally so pls, pls start educating yourself. Too many here want to talk about it in the abstract or debate the virtues or dangers and that beyond ok but it’s not ok to not understand the counter point which is this is profound technology and you should learn to harness it ❣️

Gary Vaynerchuk

19,980 просмотров • 1 год назад

Claude Code is the OpenClaw alternative you already had. I've been telling people this in person for three months. Now it's a piece on Every 📧. When OpenClaw was at peak hype a few months ago, everyone was going crazy over it — for good reasons. But almost nobody made the obvious comparison: Claude Code already does the thing you love about OpenClaw. In a lot of cases, better. Here's why people missed it. You have to understand the difference between a model and a harness. OpenClaw, at the end of the day, is just a harness on top of AI models. And Claude Code is too — it just got marketed as a coding tool, an alternative to Cursor. Until Cowork launched, almost nobody looked at it as a tool for non-programmers. Dan Shipper 📧 was one of the earliest to make that claim, and he was damn right. Let Claude Code run from the home folder of your computer with free access, and you get exactly what made OpenClaw exciting. Instead of just arguing it, here's a video walkthrough of a couple of my AI employees i built on the Claude Code harness. And here's the full article:

Claude Code is the OpenClaw alternative you already had. I've been telling people this in person for three months. Now it's a piece on Every 📧. When OpenClaw was at peak hype a few months ago, everyone was going crazy over it — for good reasons. But almost nobody made the obvious comparison: Claude Code already does the thing you love about OpenClaw. In a lot of cases, better. Here's why people missed it. You have to understand the difference between a model and a harness. OpenClaw, at the end of the day, is just a harness on top of AI models. And Claude Code is too — it just got marketed as a coding tool, an alternative to Cursor. Until Cowork launched, almost nobody looked at it as a tool for non-programmers. Dan Shipper 📧 was one of the earliest to make that claim, and he was damn right. Let Claude Code run from the home folder of your computer with free access, and you get exactly what made OpenClaw exciting. Instead of just arguing it, here's a video walkthrough of a couple of my AI employees i built on the Claude Code harness. And here's the full article:

Nityesh

22,895 просмотров • 27 дней назад

Most people think prompting is just writing better sentences Anthropic shows why that's wrong This 32-minute workshop breaks down how prompts are built for production Not prompt hacks Not "act as" Not another $300 course Actual systems Evals Edge cases Model migration Agent loops Good prompt is not one message It's a workflow the model can follow, test and improve This matters because every new claude opus or sonnet will still reward the same rules Watch the prompting playbook Bookmark it before your next bad ai answer is just a bad setup

Most people think prompting is just writing better sentences Anthropic shows why that's wrong This 32-minute workshop breaks down how prompts are built for production Not prompt hacks Not "act as" Not another $300 course Actual systems Evals Edge cases Model migration Agent loops Good prompt is not one message It's a workflow the model can follow, test and improve This matters because every new claude opus or sonnet will still reward the same rules Watch the prompting playbook Bookmark it before your next bad ai answer is just a bad setup

rari

390,471 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

How to use 50+ API keys (models) for FREE on OpenClaw API??? - go to - login or register your account - click on "more models" - click on "use case" and select what you need it for - choose the model and open it - click on "view code" → "Generate API key" many models don't allow direct deploy, so use the "view code" button to generate API access basically Nvidia NIM gives you the ability to test almost any model from their list for FREE some of them are not worse than GPT 5.2 or Claude Opus 4.6, some might even perform better depending on the task how to understand if a model is efficient and compare it with others??? - go to - type the model name in search - click on "benchmarks" - you’ll see performance tests and rankings this way you can easily compare free models with paid ones of course there are RPM limits, on many models it’s around ~40 requests per minute each model is different, after generating the API key, RPM limits are shown in the top-right corner nothing stops you from using them, many work perfectly fine, super solid option for first tests and for learning OpenClaw or any other system where you need an AI API model

How to use 50+ API keys (models) for FREE on OpenClaw API??? - go to - login or register your account - click on "more models" - click on "use case" and select what you need it for - choose the model and open it - click on "view code" → "Generate API key" many models don't allow direct deploy, so use the "view code" button to generate API access basically Nvidia NIM gives you the ability to test almost any model from their list for FREE some of them are not worse than GPT 5.2 or Claude Opus 4.6, some might even perform better depending on the task how to understand if a model is efficient and compare it with others??? - go to - type the model name in search - click on "benchmarks" - you’ll see performance tests and rankings this way you can easily compare free models with paid ones of course there are RPM limits, on many models it’s around ~40 requests per minute each model is different, after generating the API key, RPM limits are shown in the top-right corner nothing stops you from using them, many work perfectly fine, super solid option for first tests and for learning OpenClaw or any other system where you need an AI API model

Ronin

58,789 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Jensen Huang just told Silicon Valley it’s fighting on the wrong floor. Every boardroom in tech is locked on the same question. Which model wins. OpenAI or xAI. GPT or Claude. Grok or Gemini. Trillions moving on that bet alone. Huang zoomed out and showed them the whole building. Huang: “AI is actually essentially a five-layer cake.” Energy at the bottom. Chips above it. Cloud above that. Models next. Applications on top. Five layers. One war. Everyone crowded onto the fourth floor. Huang: “This is where most people think AI is.” He was pointing at the model layer. Every pitch deck. Every valuation. Every founder story. All packed onto one floor. One floor below the finish line. Three above the foundation. The middle of the building. Huang: “At the bottom is energy.” Not data. Not parameters. Not talent. Power. You cannot out-code the grid. You cannot train a frontier model with a press release. The smartest model on Earth still needs a dumb turbine spinning somewhere. The smartest engineers alive are building on top of someone else’s silicon, inside someone else’s cloud, powered by someone else’s electricity. They own nothing beneath them. Huang: “This layer on top ultimately is where economic benefit will happen.” Healthcare. Finance. Manufacturing. The only floors where AI actually meets money. Every dollar of real value lives at the top. Every physical constraint that decides who gets to play lives at the bottom. The model sits in between. Squeezed from above and below and owning neither end. Silicon Valley is burning hundreds of billions to build plumbing for somebody else’s economy. The basement decides if it runs. The penthouse decides if it pays. The companies building models think they are building the future. Huang just told them they are the middle layer in someone else’s cake.

Jensen Huang just told Silicon Valley it’s fighting on the wrong floor. Every boardroom in tech is locked on the same question. Which model wins. OpenAI or xAI. GPT or Claude. Grok or Gemini. Trillions moving on that bet alone. Huang zoomed out and showed them the whole building. Huang: “AI is actually essentially a five-layer cake.” Energy at the bottom. Chips above it. Cloud above that. Models next. Applications on top. Five layers. One war. Everyone crowded onto the fourth floor. Huang: “This is where most people think AI is.” He was pointing at the model layer. Every pitch deck. Every valuation. Every founder story. All packed onto one floor. One floor below the finish line. Three above the foundation. The middle of the building. Huang: “At the bottom is energy.” Not data. Not parameters. Not talent. Power. You cannot out-code the grid. You cannot train a frontier model with a press release. The smartest model on Earth still needs a dumb turbine spinning somewhere. The smartest engineers alive are building on top of someone else’s silicon, inside someone else’s cloud, powered by someone else’s electricity. They own nothing beneath them. Huang: “This layer on top ultimately is where economic benefit will happen.” Healthcare. Finance. Manufacturing. The only floors where AI actually meets money. Every dollar of real value lives at the top. Every physical constraint that decides who gets to play lives at the bottom. The model sits in between. Squeezed from above and below and owning neither end. Silicon Valley is burning hundreds of billions to build plumbing for somebody else’s economy. The basement decides if it runs. The penthouse decides if it pays. The companies building models think they are building the future. Huang just told them they are the middle layer in someone else’s cake.

Dustin

536,008 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Respan Launch Week, Day 2: Evals Evals are one of the hardest parts of building AI applications. It is not because teams cannot run them. It is because they are hard to structure, hard to compare, and even harder to improve over time. So teams end up guessing. Did this prompt actually get better? Is this model really an improvement? We built Evals in Respan to make this systematic. You define: - what you want to test, such as prompts, models, or configs - the dataset, from production logs or test cases - the evaluators, whether LLM, code, human, or a mix Then you run experiments and compare results side by side. Same inputs. Same evaluation. Clear answers. No more guessing. Start running your first eval.

Respan Launch Week, Day 2: Evals Evals are one of the hardest parts of building AI applications. It is not because teams cannot run them. It is because they are hard to structure, hard to compare, and even harder to improve over time. So teams end up guessing. Did this prompt actually get better? Is this model really an improvement? We built Evals in Respan to make this systematic. You define: - what you want to test, such as prompts, models, or configs - the dataset, from production logs or test cases - the evaluators, whether LLM, code, human, or a mix Then you run experiments and compare results side by side. Same inputs. Same evaluation. Clear answers. No more guessing. Start running your first eval.

Respan

127,653 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

🎉Introducing PyFlue: The Python-Native Agent Harness Framework.🧰 💡Flue for Python: Fred K. Schott fks CEO of HTML has launched Flue: The Agent Harness Framework for TypeScript. It brings programmable harness right into your agents rather than DIY plumbing. Python ecosystem already has 🦾 powerful AI/ML tools and frameworks and research initiatives but most frameworks asked users to build your own harness. Superagentic AI bringing this concept of Flue to Python 🐍 ecosystem. Here is PyFlue even even better 🤖 Agent = Model 💻 + Harness 🧰 + Memory 🧠 Almost all the feature of Flue plugged with LangChain Deepagents harness built by Harrison Chase and team Viv Sydney Runkle and more coming soon. 👉 Stop building agent loops, start using a harness. 💻 Try PyFlue Now : ⭐️ GitHub: 📚Docs: 📙 Blog Post: #HarnessEngineering #AgentHarnesses

🎉Introducing PyFlue: The Python-Native Agent Harness Framework.🧰 💡Flue for Python: Fred K. Schott fks CEO of HTML has launched Flue: The Agent Harness Framework for TypeScript. It brings programmable harness right into your agents rather than DIY plumbing. Python ecosystem already has 🦾 powerful AI/ML tools and frameworks and research initiatives but most frameworks asked users to build your own harness. Superagentic AI bringing this concept of Flue to Python 🐍 ecosystem. Here is PyFlue even even better 🤖 Agent = Model 💻 + Harness 🧰 + Memory 🧠 Almost all the feature of Flue plugged with LangChain Deepagents harness built by Harrison Chase and team Viv Sydney Runkle and more coming soon. 👉 Stop building agent loops, start using a harness. 💻 Try PyFlue Now : ⭐️ GitHub: 📚Docs: 📙 Blog Post: #HarnessEngineering #AgentHarnesses

Shashi 🇬🇧🇺🇸

69,688 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

let me save you 3 hours of head scratching. if you're running local models like Qwen3.5-35B-A3B through Claude Code via llama.cpp's Anthropic endpoint, the chain will break every 3 to 5 minutes. tool call fails. flow stops. you reprompt. it recovers. 2 minutes later it stops again. the model is fine. the harness chokes on local inference latency. switch to OpenCode. same localhost endpoint. same model. same GPU. the chain doesn't break. the tradeoff: OpenCode sometimes loops. the model forgets what it already read and repeats the same tool call. but a loop you can interrupt. a broken chain kills your momentum and you start over. watch both side by side. proprietary agent vs open source agent. same 3B model. different failure modes. pick your poison.

let me save you 3 hours of head scratching. if you're running local models like Qwen3.5-35B-A3B through Claude Code via llama.cpp's Anthropic endpoint, the chain will break every 3 to 5 minutes. tool call fails. flow stops. you reprompt. it recovers. 2 minutes later it stops again. the model is fine. the harness chokes on local inference latency. switch to OpenCode. same localhost endpoint. same model. same GPU. the chain doesn't break. the tradeoff: OpenCode sometimes loops. the model forgets what it already read and repeats the same tool call. but a loop you can interrupt. a broken chain kills your momentum and you start over. watch both side by side. proprietary agent vs open source agent. same 3B model. different failure modes. pick your poison.

Sudo su

72,501 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Kimi's CEO🇨🇳 says every AI lab has the wrong obsession Zhilin Yang, on why K3 beat the frontier: "Every lab, like Claude, thinks the model matters most. That's wrong. It's how you organize the people building it that wins." Then Moonshot proved the philosophy. K3 sold out every plan on purpose, cutting their own revenue instead of throttling existing users. When Anthropic hit that wall in April, they cut users' usage 50% at peak. His one big idea: long context is the AI era's RAM. The 128K-to-gigabytes jump, compressed into 2 years instead of 40. The real moat: "your biggest advantage, perhaps your only advantage, is your organization." Model, or the team behind it: which actually wins?

Kimi's CEO🇨🇳 says every AI lab has the wrong obsession Zhilin Yang, on why K3 beat the frontier: "Every lab, like Claude, thinks the model matters most. That's wrong. It's how you organize the people building it that wins." Then Moonshot proved the philosophy. K3 sold out every plan on purpose, cutting their own revenue instead of throttling existing users. When Anthropic hit that wall in April, they cut users' usage 50% at peak. His one big idea: long context is the AI era's RAM. The 128K-to-gigabytes jump, compressed into 2 years instead of 40. The real moat: "your biggest advantage, perhaps your only advantage, is your organization." Model, or the team behind it: which actually wins?

Ruben

1,736,706 просмотров • 3 дней назад

I couldn't believe the results of this benchmarking test. I blind-tested 6 frontier models — Sonnet 5, Opus 4.8, Fable 5, GPT 5.5, GLM 5.2, and Kimi 2.5 — on knowledge work, not engineering. Writing. Analysis. Design. Vibe coding. Subagent simulations. The stuff we actually do all day. Same prompts, each model running its own subagent, every output graded blind before the labels were revealed. The results: → GLM 5.2 (the dirt-cheap open-source model from China) took first → Sonnet 5 took second, beating Fable 5 for knowledge work → Opus 4.8 got whooped Then I had Composer 2.5 judge every output independently — and it picked Fable 5 almost across the board. My blind picks and the AI judge completely disagreed. Full breakdown, method, and prompts in the video below. Which model are you running as your daily driver right now?

I couldn't believe the results of this benchmarking test. I blind-tested 6 frontier models — Sonnet 5, Opus 4.8, Fable 5, GPT 5.5, GLM 5.2, and Kimi 2.5 — on knowledge work, not engineering. Writing. Analysis. Design. Vibe coding. Subagent simulations. The stuff we actually do all day. Same prompts, each model running its own subagent, every output graded blind before the labels were revealed. The results: → GLM 5.2 (the dirt-cheap open-source model from China) took first → Sonnet 5 took second, beating Fable 5 for knowledge work → Opus 4.8 got whooped Then I had Composer 2.5 judge every output independently — and it picked Fable 5 almost across the board. My blind picks and the AI judge completely disagreed. Full breakdown, method, and prompts in the video below. Which model are you running as your daily driver right now?

JJ Englert

10,737 просмотров • 21 дней назад

THIS GUY SPENT 5 MINUTES SETTING UP A $20 CLAUDE WORKSPACE AND TURNED 30 MINUTES OF DAILY PROMPT CHAOS INTO A SYSTEM Most people open Claude, type 1 messy prompt, rewrite it 10 times, get the same generic answer and call the model “bad.” He opens Claude Cowork, adds the project rules, past context, working files, examples, decisions and a clean place for the model to remember what it is doing. Same Claude. Same $20 tool. Completely different output. The funny part is there is no magic prompt here. No secret template. No “10x Claude” trick. Just the boring layer Karpathy keeps pointing at: context, memory and structure before output. A setup like this can save 30 minutes a day, which is 15 hours a month. If you use Claude for client work at $50 to $100/hour, that is $750 to $1,500/month in time you stop burning on repeated prompts. The model is real. The output is real. The edge is in not making Claude start from zero every single time.

THIS GUY SPENT 5 MINUTES SETTING UP A $20 CLAUDE WORKSPACE AND TURNED 30 MINUTES OF DAILY PROMPT CHAOS INTO A SYSTEM Most people open Claude, type 1 messy prompt, rewrite it 10 times, get the same generic answer and call the model “bad.” He opens Claude Cowork, adds the project rules, past context, working files, examples, decisions and a clean place for the model to remember what it is doing. Same Claude. Same $20 tool. Completely different output. The funny part is there is no magic prompt here. No secret template. No “10x Claude” trick. Just the boring layer Karpathy keeps pointing at: context, memory and structure before output. A setup like this can save 30 minutes a day, which is 15 hours a month. If you use Claude for client work at $50 to $100/hour, that is $750 to $1,500/month in time you stop burning on repeated prompts. The model is real. The output is real. The edge is in not making Claude start from zero every single time.

Gipp 🦅

14,871 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

OPUS 4.6 WAS NERFED DUE TO DEMAND BUT OPUS 4.5 DOES NOT SEEM TO BE HIT this guy ran the same test on both models. Opus 4.6 fails consistently but Opus 4.5 passes every time he switched back to Opus 4.5 on Claude Code and said "what a difference, feels like i got Opus back finally" he is now using this test as a "quantization canary" that runs it at the start of every session before doing real work. if it fails, the model is degraded. five Opus 4.6 windows in a row failed the untransparent nerfing is pushing people to cancel their Max plans if you've been feeling like Opus got dumber lately, you're not imagining it i'd suggest switching to Opus 4.5 to see the difference for yourself

OPUS 4.6 WAS NERFED DUE TO DEMAND BUT OPUS 4.5 DOES NOT SEEM TO BE HIT this guy ran the same test on both models. Opus 4.6 fails consistently but Opus 4.5 passes every time he switched back to Opus 4.5 on Claude Code and said "what a difference, feels like i got Opus back finally" he is now using this test as a "quantization canary" that runs it at the start of every session before doing real work. if it fails, the model is degraded. five Opus 4.6 windows in a row failed the untransparent nerfing is pushing people to cancel their Max plans if you've been feeling like Opus got dumber lately, you're not imagining it i'd suggest switching to Opus 4.5 to see the difference for yourself

Om Patel

695,762 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Qwopus on a single RTX 3090. Claude Opus 4.6 reasoning distilled into Qwen 3.5 27B dense, running through Claude's own coding agent (claude code). 29-35 tok/s with thinking mode on. the jinja bug that kills thinking on base Qwen doesn't carry over. harness and model matched. the base model would pause mid task on Claude Code. just stop generating. that's why i ran it through OpenCode, which handles stalled states automatically. this distilled version doesn't stall. it waits for tool outputs, reads them, selfcorrects when something breaks, and keeps going. i gave it a benchmark analysis task. went 9 minutes autonomous. wrote a README nobody asked for. zero steering. video is 5x speed but fully uncut. if you have a 3090, you can run this right now. free. no API. no subscription. opus structured reasoning on localhost. octopus invaders is next. same prompt that base qwen passed in 13 minutes and hermes 4.3 failed on 2x the hardware. i want to see if the distillation changes the outcome or just the style. more data soon.

Qwopus on a single RTX 3090. Claude Opus 4.6 reasoning distilled into Qwen 3.5 27B dense, running through Claude's own coding agent (claude code). 29-35 tok/s with thinking mode on. the jinja bug that kills thinking on base Qwen doesn't carry over. harness and model matched. the base model would pause mid task on Claude Code. just stop generating. that's why i ran it through OpenCode, which handles stalled states automatically. this distilled version doesn't stall. it waits for tool outputs, reads them, selfcorrects when something breaks, and keeps going. i gave it a benchmark analysis task. went 9 minutes autonomous. wrote a README nobody asked for. zero steering. video is 5x speed but fully uncut. if you have a 3090, you can run this right now. free. no API. no subscription. opus structured reasoning on localhost. octopus invaders is next. same prompt that base qwen passed in 13 minutes and hermes 4.3 failed on 2x the hardware. i want to see if the distillation changes the outcome or just the style. more data soon.

Sudo su

295,349 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Andrej Karpathy, founding member of OpenAI and ex-Director of AI at Tesla: "creators are paying $5,000 a month to agencies to build the exact AI 'content factory' this free talk hands you in 39 minutes." this free 2025 talk holds the entire "$1M YouTube on autopilot" the 2026 threads sell you for $500. karpathy explains the whole thing on stage: the model is the new computer, your only job is to feed it memory and verify what it gives back. that's the "second brain." that's it. the gurus wrap it in obsidian folders, a /wiki command and a "secret stack." karpathy handed you the actual idea for zero dollars -> dump raw sources in one place, let the model synthesize and maintain an interlinked wiki it can actually use. raw → synthesis → reuse. the architecture's been public the whole time. and here's the part the thread skips. he calls these models "people spirits" -> fallible, confidently wrong, output you check, not trust. the moat was never the obsidian setup. the moat is what you feed it and the judgment to catch where it's lying. the folder structure is free. the taste isn't. bookmark & watch today ↓

Andrej Karpathy, founding member of OpenAI and ex-Director of AI at Tesla: "creators are paying $5,000 a month to agencies to build the exact AI 'content factory' this free talk hands you in 39 minutes." this free 2025 talk holds the entire "$1M YouTube on autopilot" the 2026 threads sell you for $500. karpathy explains the whole thing on stage: the model is the new computer, your only job is to feed it memory and verify what it gives back. that's the "second brain." that's it. the gurus wrap it in obsidian folders, a /wiki command and a "secret stack." karpathy handed you the actual idea for zero dollars -> dump raw sources in one place, let the model synthesize and maintain an interlinked wiki it can actually use. raw → synthesis → reuse. the architecture's been public the whole time. and here's the part the thread skips. he calls these models "people spirits" -> fallible, confidently wrong, output you check, not trust. the moat was never the obsidian setup. the moat is what you feed it and the judgment to catch where it's lying. the folder structure is free. the taste isn't. bookmark & watch today ↓

Ridark

48,183 просмотров • 27 дней назад

I just found a way to use Claude Code completely free. Claude Code is Anthropic’s terminal coding agent that usually needs a paid API key to run. But a viral GitHub project called Free Claude Code, now sitting at 37k stars, lets you skip the billing entirely. It works as a tiny proxy that sits between Claude Code and free model providers like NVIDIA NIM, OpenRouter, DeepSeek, and Gemini. Every request Claude Code would send to Anthropic gets quietly rerouted to a free model on the other side. The interface stays the same. What’s actually thinking behind it changes. Setup takes a couple of quick commands and a free API key from NVIDIA NIM or OpenRouter. Paste it into the local dashboard, pick a model, and you’re building. The catch is you’re not really using Claude anymore. But when the code ships, does the model badge matter? -- I have shared the Github Link in my free Whatsapp Community ↓

I just found a way to use Claude Code completely free. Claude Code is Anthropic’s terminal coding agent that usually needs a paid API key to run. But a viral GitHub project called Free Claude Code, now sitting at 37k stars, lets you skip the billing entirely. It works as a tiny proxy that sits between Claude Code and free model providers like NVIDIA NIM, OpenRouter, DeepSeek, and Gemini. Every request Claude Code would send to Anthropic gets quietly rerouted to a free model on the other side. The interface stays the same. What’s actually thinking behind it changes. Setup takes a couple of quick commands and a free API key from NVIDIA NIM or OpenRouter. Paste it into the local dashboard, pick a model, and you’re building. The catch is you’re not really using Claude anymore. But when the code ships, does the model badge matter? -- I have shared the Github Link in my free Whatsapp Community ↓

Vaibhav Sisinty

36,560 просмотров • 21 дней назад

This is some good information to know. The US mail system aggregates stewardship of delivery but not deadlines. The work around this is signing up for USPS digital or online account and it is free service. It sends you an image scan via email of the current postal mail to be delivered that day so the proof of what was delivered or not is given to you. You get a notification everyday whether you have mail or not. I don't know if this service varies by state so consider looking into the availability for your postal zip code covered area. . 's a state-by-state. If you can get this access depending on the state you live in. But I believe every state should have the account. You can set it up, it's easy. And then you can see your mail. That's coming. If you have packages coming, you can see your account and it gives you notifications every day regardless if you get mail or not, whether you have something coming or not. #Inspirenaire

This is some good information to know. The US mail system aggregates stewardship of delivery but not deadlines. The work around this is signing up for USPS digital or online account and it is free service. It sends you an image scan via email of the current postal mail to be delivered that day so the proof of what was delivered or not is given to you. You get a notification everyday whether you have mail or not. I don't know if this service varies by state so consider looking into the availability for your postal zip code covered area. . 's a state-by-state. If you can get this access depending on the state you live in. But I believe every state should have the account. You can set it up, it's easy. And then you can see your mail. That's coming. If you have packages coming, you can see your account and it gives you notifications every day regardless if you get mail or not, whether you have something coming or not. #Inspirenaire

Inspirenaire

18,205 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад